Transcript Highlights:

• Let's just sit down and let's do those and make it so that when we put a logging sale up for sale, we
• That just makes sense, and we're not even doing that. not a sale a trade and throughout the not a sale
• </c><00:02:54.560><c> partial</c> was going to be a partial sale partial was going to be a partial sale
• up for sale we don't have to go sale up for sale we don't have to go through<00:05:19.039><c> the</c
• is not in the public's best interest. proceeds of sales of the school trust proceeds of sales of the

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The committee took up HF 1425, which would prohibit the sale of state-owned school trust lands in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness to the federal government and instead require a land trade. Representative Skraba argued the federal wilderness law requires an exchange, not a sale, and said the state should trade Boundary Waters school trust lands for federal lands elsewhere, citing potential benefits for logging, mining, and school trust revenue. He said the current proposed sale price was too low and moved to lay the bill over for possible inclusion in a future bill. Later, he withdrew a DE1 amendment and instead moved to re-refer the bill to the Education Finance Committee, but that motion failed. Testimony was largely opposed to the bill. Aaron Vandal of the Office of School Trust Lands said the exchange option was no longer viable, that the lands have produced no revenue for education for decades, and that selling them is the trust’s last opportunity to generate returns for schoolchildren. Bob Meyer of the DNR supported Vandal’s position and said the agency could not negotiate mineral rights in the way suggested. Aon Clems of the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy and Amanda Hefner of Save the Boundary Waters both opposed HF 1425, though they emphasized different reasons: Clems argued a sale best fulfills the state’s fiduciary duty to maximize long-term returns for education, while Hefner said a sale would harm public education funding, align with the trust’s original purpose, and help consolidate federal ownership in the wilderness. Members then questioned the valuation and the practical differences between a sale and an exchange. Representative Jacob challenged the low per-acre price and asked about the federal government’s set-aside amount, while Representative Fischer asked how the appraisal was determined. DNR lands and minerals director Joe Henderson explained the valuation came from an independent appraiser, was based on the wilderness restrictions and lack of development potential, and was from a 2020 appraisal that is now being updated. Representative Schultz supported the sale approach and said the state should not transfer the land at such a low price. The committee did not advance the bill to the Education Finance Committee.

Transcript Highlights:

• of Purpose, it lists five different things it addresses in this bill, everything from narrowing the sales
• It also puts in some requirements for the Tax Commission to tell us the approximate amount of sales tax
• So it was often presented as just a sales tax exemption on that internal equipment.
• So it was often presented as just a sales tax exemption on that internal equipment.
• And many states have a limit on how long that sales tax exemption lasts for.

Committee: House Revenue and Taxation

Keywords: 989, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The shift to sales tax can be dramatic.
• Tennessee's state sales tax rate is 7%. Missouri's state sales tax rate is 4.225%.
• Sales tax, certainly, you have some control over your consumption, Sales tax, certainly, you have some
• of the sales and use tax base or increase in the state sales and use tax rate.
• Sales taxes are already too high.

Summary: The House convened with prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance, approval of the House Journal by roll call vote (117-5), and a long series of special guest introductions, including YouthBuild students, school groups, family members, former legislators, and a Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Day recognition. The chamber then moved to third-reading business and reconsideration motions on House Committee Substitute for House Bills 3283 and 3306. Members explained the bills needed to be sent back to Legislative Review to address possible conflicts with current case law and to tighten the language, especially around arbitration and municipal/court jurisdiction issues. The reconsideration motions and the motion to commit the bills to Legislative Review all passed by roll call votes in the 98-43 range. The House then took up House Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 982, which would revise Missouri’s sex offender registry system. The sponsor said the bill responds to concerns from an advocacy group and registry administrators, converting Missouri from a hybrid offense-based system to a true tier-based system aligned with federal SORNA standards, clarifying who must register, reducing litigation exposure, and adding related language on civil commitment housing, name changes, and carnival employees. Members asked about whether offenders could eventually petition off the registry; the sponsor said the bill would streamline removal where allowed under the tier system. House Amendment 1, correcting a typo, was adopted, the committee substitute was adopted, and the bill was third read and passed 141-4. The House also debated House Joint Resolutions 173 and 174, a proposal to amend the constitution to phase out the state income tax and shift more of the tax burden toward sales and use taxes over time. Supporters argued the current income tax hurts the middle class, discourages growth, and places Missouri at a disadvantage compared with no-income-tax states like Tennessee; they said the measure would let voters decide and could improve economic development, population growth, and fairness by making taxes more visible and consumption-based. Opponents argued the plan would raise taxes on most Missourians, especially low- and middle-income families, seniors on fixed incomes, and people who spend more of their income on necessities, and that it would shift costs onto consumers while weakening funding for schools, health care, and other services. The debate was extensive and included questions about constitutional tax limits, revenue neutrality, and comparisons to Tennessee and Washington, but no final vote on the resolutions was shown in the transcript.

Transcript Highlights:

• Revenue</c><00:21:49.840><c> sales</c> Minnesota Department of Revenue sales Minnesota Department of
• </c><00:25:21.880><c> tax</c> 26 and once again exempt the sales tax 26 and once again exempt the sales
• </c> effort uh this is a request for sales effort uh this is a request for sales tax<00:45:43.119><c>
• </c><01:03:39.440><c> tax</c> County voters approved the sales tax County voters approved the sales tax
• </c><01:05:25.000><c> materials</c> sales tax charging sales tax materials sales tax charging sales tax

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> Senate File 2795 requesting the sales Senate File 2795 requesting the sales tax<00:15:58.160><c>
• The city, in part with the sales tax funding that we'll receive from the revenues of our local sales
• The city, in part with the sales tax funding that we'll receive from the revenues of our local sales
• The city, in part with the sales tax funding that we'll receive from the revenues of our local sales
• The sales tax $22,000 per student.

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The second proposed substitute removes all provisions related to sales tax.
• All provisions related to sales tax. Happy to answer any questions. Thank you so much.
• be a credit against the state sales and use tax.
• be a credit against the state sales and use tax.
• tax on the same sale.

Summary: House Finance heard briefings on several tax and housing-related bills, including HB 1717 on a local sales and use tax remittance program for affordable housing, HB 1859 on expanding density bonuses for housing on religious organization property, HB 1960 on a renewable energy excise tax, HB 2133 on making a senior citizen center property tax exemption permanent, HB 2135 on extending a disabled veterans housing sales tax preference, HB 2140 on tax treatment for land transferred to government entities, HB 2442 on a broad package of local tax and levy changes, and HB 2559 on a local option short-term rental tax for affordable housing. Staff also described multiple proposed substitutes and amendments, many of them technical or aimed at shifting administrative duties, changing tax credits, or requiring voter approval. In executive session, the committee adopted a substitute for HB 1717 and reported it out unanimously with a due pass recommendation. HB 1859 was also reported out with a due pass recommendation after members discussed added flexibility for affordable housing on faith-owned land. For HB 1960, the committee adopted amendments clarifying tax administration and JLARC review, rejected an amendment that would have adjusted property tax levies to offset shifts, and then advanced the bill on an 11-4 vote. HB 2133 and HB 2135 both received technical amendments and were reported out unanimously, with members emphasizing the value of permanent or extended tax preferences for senior centers and disabled veterans. The committee then advanced HB 2140, which narrows tax consequences when land is transferred to a governmental entity and is used for current-use purposes, with members describing it as a fix for unintended burdens on landowners and farmers. HB 2442, a large local government finance package, drew the most debate; amendments to make new taxes credits against state taxes and to require voter approval were rejected, and the bill passed 9-6. HB 2559, which would allow a local option excise tax on short-term rentals to fund affordable housing, also saw rejected amendments on state tax credits, local control, and voter approval before passing 9-6. Throughout, supporters framed the bills as tools for local governments and affordable housing, while opponents argued they would increase taxes and should require direct voter approval or state offsets.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, now you have the lien sale and you have the land sale.
• Um, now you have the lien sale and you have the land sale.
• Okay. >> Lee County does still does a land sale. So they do a deed sale.
• Okay. >> Lee County does still does a land sale. So they do a deed sale.
• </c> lot of times in in tax sales. lot of times in in tax sales.

Committee: House Boards, Agencies and Commissions

Keywords: 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The blue columns contain the income and sales The blue columns contain the income and sales for the domestic
• It's got half of sales in California.
• It's got half of sales in California.
• home country, and only California sales are here.
• Because California has a single sales factor. So single sales factor is good.

Summary: The joint informational hearing focused on California’s taxation of foreign subsidiaries of U.S. corporations, especially the state’s water’s-edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Committee members and witnesses discussed how unitary taxation and sales-factor apportionment work, why multinational corporations are a small share of filers but a large share of tax liability, and how foreign income, profit shifting, and double taxation concerns affect policy choices. The Franchise Tax Board explained current filing rules, the seven-year water’s-edge election, and recent filing statistics showing about 21,562 water’s-edge returns in 2023, roughly 6% of C corporation filers but about half of corporate tax liability. The Legislative Analyst’s Office and FTB staff emphasized that revenue effects from eliminating water’s edge are uncertain because foreign affiliate income is not directly observable, and they noted possible revenue volatility and administrative complexity. Several committee members asked about foreign government pushback, the burden on FTB, whether certain industries are more likely to shift profits, and whether companies would leave California; witnesses generally said there was no strong evidence that firms would exit the state because tax liability is driven mainly by California sales. They also discussed how California already administers both methods, how the election can be advantageous or disadvantageous depending on a firm’s facts, and how federal reforms like GILTI/NCTI, CAMT, and OECD Pillar Two may affect the issue. The second panel presented sharply contrasting views. One professor and a tax policy advocate argued that water’s edge creates unfairness, encourages profit shifting, and leaves California with billions in lost revenue, while a Tax Foundation witness argued that mandatory worldwide reporting would tax the wrong income, create double taxation and litigation risk, and impose heavy compliance burdens, especially for foreign-based multinationals. A later panel from the California Budget and Policy Center supported closing the “water’s-edge loophole,” saying it would raise needed revenue for public services and level the playing field between large multinationals and smaller domestic businesses. No vote or formal action was taken; the hearing was informational only.

Transcript Highlights:

• Independent research shows that allowing direct sales of EVs could...
• And then other locations where we also provide sales...
• There will be sales locations. And then, so... ...locations.
• And then, so we can go into a sales location to buy a new Rivian.
• And in this bill, some direct sales manufacturers would be treated as dealers.

Committee: House Transportation

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> which is about 1.8% of their sales which is about 1.8% of their sales tax<00:53:49.040><c> uh</c
• ><c> taxes</c> so any of those metro area sales taxes so any of those metro area sales taxes does<01:
• the state sales tax, but your county sales taxes, the new housing sales tax, the local sales taxes—so
• the state sales tax, but your county sales taxes, the new housing sales tax, the local sales taxes—so
• </c><01:14:06.840><c> tax</c> sales taxes not just the state sales tax sales taxes not just the state

Committee: House Taxes

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> domestic sales. domestic sales.
• :04.920><c> materials,</c> on construction sales tax materials, on construction sales tax materials,
• </c> On the sales tax statewide.
• “Now, is domestic sales specifically having to deal with sales in the state of Minnesota? I see Mr.
• </c> domestic sales? domestic sales?

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:18:36.880><c> tax</c><00:18:37.280><c> was</c> motor vehicle sales tax was motor vehicle sales
• </c> regional sales and use tax uh functions. regional sales and use tax uh functions.
• </c><00:42:31.440><c> and</c> This flowchart shows uh the sales and This flowchart shows uh the sales
• Mindot transportation sales tax.
• </c> transportation sales tax. transportation sales tax.

Bills: HF4693

Committee: House Transportation Finance and Policy

Keywords: transportation, license plates, validation stickers, replacement fees, government fees, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• Adding services to the sales tax does lessen or make more progressive the sales tax.
• </c> here Services excluded from the sales here Services excluded from the sales tax<00:31:15.120><c>
• we're changing the sales tax because we're changing the sales tax rate<00:36:40.720><c> but</c><00:36
• It has no impact on the rates on local sales taxes or any of the metro sales taxes.
• It's a big change to go from assessing sales tax on optional services to charging sales tax on a fee

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• As a condition of the sale, butter slot.
• The sale will be administrative fee.
• ><c> the</c><00:13:50.880><c> grantee</c> condition of this sale, the grantee condition of this sale,
• The grantee shall be responsible sale.
• The sale would be direct land in Albany.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Long Range Capital Planning and Utilization Committee met and approved the minutes from June 30, 2025. There was no old business. The committee then heard a series of New Hampshire Department of Transportation requests involving the sale or disposal of state-owned land and easements, including an access point sale in Exeter, land sales in Keene, Guilford, Lincoln, Conway, Chesterfield, Fremont, Belmont, and a utility easement in Albany. Most items were direct sales to abutters or towns, with conditions such as obtaining local and state approvals, commissioning boundary surveys, and paying administrative fees; each of these items was approved by motion and vote. One Guilford parcel was amended to reflect a smaller surveyed area and reduced appraised value before approval. The committee also approved a permanent access easement for a single-family residence on Route 153 in support of the Bickford property. The committee then considered a Department of Administrative Services item, presented as a substitution replacement, authorizing a perpetual utility line easement to Public Service Company of New Hampshire for a facility under construction on the Hampstead hospital property that will serve as the replacement facility for the Manchester senior center. The department requested waiver of the administrative fee because the easement was being granted in exchange for utility service, and the committee approved the request. An informational item, LRCP25-038, was discussed regarding a reduction in fair market value due to a change in access; staff explained no committee action was required because the item was informational only. Additional informational materials from the New Hampshire Council on Resources and Development were received, including meeting minutes and surplus land review memorandums for Meredith and Hampstead. Before adjourning, the committee set its next meeting for December 9 at 9:30 a.m. at Granite Place, Room 228, noting the meeting would be on a Tuesday rather than Monday because of building scheduling. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn, which was seconded and approved.

Transcript Highlights:

• that retail sale to the extent that they have nexus with the state.
• That would be then, you know, a retail sale to the farmer.
• that retail sale to the extent that they have nexus with the state.
• We are ready for energy sales to silicon smelters now.
• These three preferences were intended to reduce the cost of electricity sales or natural gas sales to

Committee: Joint Citizen Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences

Summary: The Citizens Commission for Performance Measurement of Tax Preferences met on August 6, 2025, with five commissioners present and a quorum. The commission approved the May 7, 2025 meeting minutes and welcomed new commissioner Scott Edwards, who introduced himself. Staff also confirmed the September meeting date had been changed to September 22, 2025 at 10:00 a.m. to accommodate his schedule, and noted that testimony questions for the public hearing would be used at that meeting. JLARC staff then presented preliminary 2025 tax preference performance reviews covering nine preferences. For natural gas used as a transportation fuel, staff said the preferences reduce fuel costs but do not meet emissions-reduction goals, and recommended continuing the public utility tax and natural gas use tax exemptions while modifying reporting requirements; they also recommended continuing the marine-use LNG sales tax exemption and considering the Department of Revenue work group’s findings. For travel agents and tour operators, staff said the small-beneficiary rate appears to support smaller firms, while the larger-beneficiary rate should be reviewed and both should have clearer objectives and metrics. For nonprofit low-income housing development, staff said the preference is helping produce housing but the current metric does not align well with the objective, data/reporting problems remain, and the legislature should decide whether to continue and possibly modify the exemption, including considering annual renewal. Staff also reviewed the multipurpose senior citizen centers exemption, concluding it meets its objective and recommending continuation, with possible consideration of making it permanent. For disabled veteran adapted housing, staff said the preference has very low uptake despite eligible veterans and recommended continuing it but modifying it in consultation with the Department of Veterans Affairs to improve use. For trade convention attendance, staff said the preference aligns Washington with other states and recommended continuation. For agricultural fertilizer and seed wholesaling, staff said the exemption reduces tax layering and recommended continuation, with clarification on whether it is exempt from expiration/performance-statement requirements. For agricultural crop protection products, staff said the preference met its revenue-growth metric and recommended extending it while considering better metrics or recategorizing it as tax relief. Finally, for energy sales to a silicon smelter, staff said the preferences were unused because the facility was never built and recommended allowing them to expire. The meeting ended with reminders about written testimony and the September public testimony session.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c><00:02:14.280><c> tax</c> the city is Seeking a general sales tax the city is Seeking a general sales
• </c> child brings us um uh a um ante a sales child brings us um uh a um ante a sales tax<00:46:11.040
• </c> grain B in southeast Minnesota the sales grain B in southeast Minnesota the sales tax<01:24:59.760
• </c> Bill to except Farm fencing from sales Bill to except Farm fencing from sales tax<01:35:41.480><
• </c> their ability to retain uh their sales their ability to retain uh their sales tax<01:44:05.360><

Committee: Senate Taxes

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• sales tax revenue for the state.
• sales tax revenue for the state.
• So that sale, we had a decline because we just said, ...no, we can't take your phone sale.
• or the beverage sales.
• or the beverage sales.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The commission met for its second hearing to study the future of credit card payments and sales transactions and their impacts on small businesses. Members heard extensive testimony from credit unions, retailers, restaurants, and payment-industry representatives on interchange fees, processing fees, fraud, chargebacks, rewards programs, and the ability of businesses to pass fees on to customers. Several witnesses argued that swipe fees have risen sharply, are especially burdensome for restaurants and other small businesses, and are charged on taxes and tips that are merely pass-through amounts. They urged state action to prohibit fees on tax and tip portions, improve transparency, and allow surcharging or convenience fees, while opponents warned that state regulation could reduce fraud protections, increase compliance costs, and threaten consumer rewards programs. Business owners and trade groups described thin margins, rising costs, and the difficulty of understanding merchant statements or negotiating with processors. Restaurant witnesses said card-not-present and online transactions create the greatest fraud and chargeback risk, with money often removed immediately from merchants’ accounts and disputes rarely resolved in their favor. Retail witnesses gave examples of rising effective rates, higher fees on rewards cards, and the burden of processing fees on low-value transactions. A representative from the Massachusetts Restaurant Association and others said restaurants are effectively paying fees on meals tax and gratuities, which they argued should not be subject to interchange charges. On the other side, the Cooperative Credit Union Association said interchange revenue helps credit unions fund fraud prevention, rapid card replacement, and member protections, and warned that state limits on interchange could weaken those safeguards and lead to higher consumer costs or reduced services. Airlines for America testified that airline credit card rewards are popular, support travel and jobs in Massachusetts, and could be harmed by interchange reform. The National Restaurant Association and a payments-policy attorney countered that interchange fees are set by card networks rather than competitive markets, that banks remain highly profitable even with rewards, and that states can act after recent court decisions. No votes were taken; the hearing consisted of testimony and questions from commissioners.

Transcript Highlights:

• A modern point-of-sale system is not just a cash register anymore.
• It's a credit off of the sales tax that is legally due and owed to the state.
• Before you move on, at the point of sale, it's very easy for retail to punch in what the sales tax is
• If you... ...point of sale, it's very easy for retail to punch in what the sales tax is at that point
• Your software at the point of sale is one system.

Summary: The Special Legislative Commission on the Future of Payments and Sales Transactions by Credit Card and the Impacts for Small Businesses held a public hearing chaired by Senator Paul Feeney and Representative Jamie Murphy. The commission reviewed its charge to gather input on payment trends, cashless transactions, credit card fees, mobile payments, buy now/pay later, and related issues affecting small businesses. Representative Sean Garballey testified in support of maintaining the current card system, emphasizing tourism’s importance to Massachusetts and arguing that universal card acceptance and interchange stability are especially important with major upcoming events and visitors. A large portion of the hearing focused on independent restaurants and small businesses arguing that credit card processing fees are burdensome and unfair when applied to sales tax and gratuities that are not business revenue. Testifiers including Jen Ziskin, Kristen Canty, Nancy Cushman, Kerry Colzer, and others described razor-thin margins and said restaurants pay fees on money passed through to the state or employees. Ryan Lotz also urged reforms to chargebacks, including refunding chargeback fees when merchants prevail, requiring consumers to contact businesses first, and making fees proportional. In response, credit union and banking representatives, including Alex Vereen, Brad Popolado, Deb Peters, and Keely McEwen, argued that interchange funds fraud protection, card infrastructure, and consumer protections, and warned that state-specific changes could create compliance burdens, higher costs, or reduced access to services. Several witnesses addressed legal and policy questions. Dan Swanson and David Montero said states have authority to regulate aspects of the payment system, but Montero warned that state-specific rules could create uncertainty and conflict with federal banking law. Julian Morris and other industry witnesses argued that card payments benefit consumers and merchants by reducing cash-handling costs and increasing spending, while critics of reform said changes could shift costs into bank fees or reduced rewards. Commission members questioned whether sales tax could be separated from card transactions, whether surcharging should be considered, and whether vendor compensation or other state-level relief might be more workable. The chairs said they were exploring a narrower, targeted approach rather than a broad overhaul, and announced plans for one additional public hearing to allow further testimony.

Transcript Highlights:

• Half of the sales are delivered, half of the sales are picked up by the consumer.
• You are also going to miss revenue if you don't have a sales tax on remote sales.
• Of that, our taxable sales, or sales that are subject to TPT, have averaged about $13,500.
• the sales taxpayers.
• It was a sales tax. Sales tax. And Pinal County. Okay. TPP to consumers, got it. Very good.

Bills: HB2143 , HB2273 , HB2290 , HB2373 , HB2784 , HB2794 , HB4037

Committee: House Ways & Means

Keywords: public safety, retirement system, investments, trust fund, board of trustees, financial report, income tax rebate, Pinal County, taxpayer eligibility, state revenue, financial assistance, transaction privilege tax, business location, tangible personal property, shared vehicle, sourcing, income tax, veterans, donations, tax refunds

Transcript Highlights:

• The blue columns contain the income and sales The blue columns contain the income and sales for the domestic
• Also note, there are $25 million of sales to California.
• It's got half of sales in California.
• It's got half of sales in California.
• home country, and only California sales are here.

Summary: The joint informational hearing examined California’s taxation of multinational corporations, especially the Water’s Edge election versus worldwide combined reporting. Chairs opened by framing the issue as a review of whether current rules fairly and sufficiently tax foreign subsidiary income, given profit shifting concerns, budget pressures, and the long history since Water’s Edge was adopted in the 1980s. The first panel from the Legislative Analyst’s Office and Franchise Tax Board explained the mechanics of unitary taxation, apportionment, and the Water’s Edge election, and provided filing data showing Water’s Edge filers are a small share of returns but account for a large share of corporate tax liability. FTB witnesses said the agency already administers both methods and could handle a shift to mandatory worldwide reporting with education and outreach, though revenue estimates are difficult because foreign affiliate information is not directly available. Committee members asked about foreign government pushback, administrative burden, industries with more profit shifting, revenue uncertainty, and whether companies would leave California. LAO and FTB witnesses said pushback from foreign governments was plausible, but they did not expect major business flight because California’s tax is largely based on sales rather than physical presence. They also said worldwide reporting could reduce profit shifting but might increase revenue volatility and litigation risk. A second panel of academic and tax policy witnesses argued that Water’s Edge is a loophole that rewards aggressive tax planning, that worldwide combined reporting would better capture income tied to California, and that modern federal and international rules such as NCTI/GILTI, CAMT, and Pillar Two reduce compliance concerns and make a return to worldwide reporting more feasible. They also said California’s current system can create selection effects and may under-tax large multinationals. In the next panel, a California Budget and Policy Center witness urged eliminating the Water’s Edge election, calling it a costly loophole that benefits large global corporations over smaller domestic businesses and deprives the state of billions in revenue that could support health care and other services. A Silicon Valley Leadership Group witness gave historical context for why Water’s Edge was adopted and began outlining concerns about compliance, double taxation, and the risk of overreaching beyond income truly connected to California. No bill was voted on or advanced; the hearing was informational only, with members using the testimony to weigh the policy trade-offs and possible transition periods if the Legislature were to change the current rules.